Five Minutes Of Alpha

There’s a reason why Silvio Berlusconi won the first ever Chateau Alpha Male Cage Match by a whopping length + girth. This paesan is a ladykiller. Further cementing Silvio’s alpha status, Ray Sawhill (formerly of 2BLowhards) sent along this article about a former Miss Montenegro beauty queen who admitted having a two year affair with Silvio. She met him two years ago when she was 18 and he was… 73. And how does Katarina feel about the age gap?

She said: ‘In love age is not important – an extraordinary person like him could be 100 years old, it would have no effect on me, he would have still struck me.’

Any regular of this blog will not be surprised by her admission. Chicks dig power above all other male attractiveness traits. Male power truly is distilled aphrodisia. A woman will present for a powerful, charming man as quickly as a man will spring a boner for a hot, young, slender, naked babe. Of course, her statement needs a qualifier to retain accuracy: In love age is not important… if you are an alpha male with compensating attractiveness traits. Plenty of boring betas grind out their wheezy decades inspiring no love in any younger women.

And for the cynics, I have no doubt Katarina loves (note: I did not say “loved”) Silvio, to the depth of her soul. Hers is real love, not fake golddigger love one so often sees when a hot chick marries a rich beta. Women’s love circuits are wired differently than men’s; a woman’s love will erupt and ensconce an apex male like Silvio, and it will be a genuine love, in much the same way a man’s love will rush out from him unbidden for a beautiful young woman.

One of the comments from a female commenter is particularly enlightening.

The allure of a powerful man like Berlusconi is something people are quick to discount unless they’ve been in the presence of one. I had an affair with a very powerful, high-profile (unmarried) politician when he was 65 and I was 18. Age didn’t matter because he was electric. He knew everything and was energectic in a way I’d never seen in boys my age, and his appetite for life was insatiable. Decades later as a long-married wife and mother I still remember him often, and quite fondly.

Five minutes of alpha floods the female brain with pleasant memories quicker than decades of beta.* I wonder how her husband would feel knowing that, despite decades of shared marital moments and children’s first words, she still warmly recalls an affair she had with a 65 year old alpha male at the ripe peak of her attractiveness? Hallmark doesn’t make cards for remembrances like that.

You don’t have to be a prime minister to capture the hearts of younger women (although it helps). I advise aging men to keep that spark of adventure they had when they were teen striplings. Do whatever it takes to avoid the long, slow surrender — the Barcalounger betrayal of your masculine birthright — and strive to maintain a sense of wonder. A dash of immaturity goes a long way toward cultivating a youthful frame of mind, which is a necessary prerequisite to winning the hearts of young women.

So raise a glass to Silvio, a refreshing anachronism in an increasingly sterile West. If you were banging babes like this…

…at the age of 73, you’d have this…

…shit-eating grin plastered on your face, too.

*A similar, albeit attenuated, feeling occurs in men, when our fondest memories veer all the way back to our first tender kiss or first intimate penetration. This memory exerts its power in men for a different reason than women’s memories do with their alpha flings; men’s first loves are often girls in their mid to late teens (or perhaps early to mid-20s for the late bloomers) when their feminine beauty and mannerism radiates at its absolute brightest. Searing beauty leaves a scorching imprint on the male brain. However, the recollection of such memories are usually less stable and permanent for men than they are for women recalling times spent with alpha males, because men who have even a modicum of experience with women have enjoyed many, many years of prime pussy, thus diluting the impact of their earliest memories.

Women, on the other hand, will often go decades in the beta wilderness trying to recapture the feeling they had with their alpha loves, hopping from one cad cock to another. Men are simply less interchangeable as lovers for women than women are interchangeable as lovers for men. It is for this reason that a fling with an alpha male will ruin a woman for all future men. A man, in contrast, is rarely ruined for all future women when he has a fling with a hot chick, unless he suffers a status and confidence drop so precipitous that the kinds of women he attracts are two or more points lower on the beauty ranking scale than his best past lover.

Like this:

Related

210 Responses

dis is why all you boys must be wary of the beranikfied bernankified goldbergered women the fed is sending forth to tame you and transfer your assetts to the fed as teh fed can onky create debt and thuse needed to created fund the feminist movement to transfer phsyical property and welath from men to beernrnke/belwtay neocncns warmonger neoncnths lzozozlzlzl

i am giving a vp speech next week in DC at a press conference with a very special announceement :

Typical. Italy is a country of moochers who have to beg their neighbors for handouts, because they are not sufficiently manly to pull their own weight, and this is what you applaud as “alpha”. Look at your definition of “alpha”–it is a fantasy you sell to bums. “Be an even bigger bum than you already are, and you will have reached the pinnacle of alphaness, because a bunch of stupid women will think you are something you’re not.” I say, be a man–an independent, self-reliant creator of wealth and thus benefactor of mankind–and the women will swarm you for what you ARE, not for the caricature you learned how to fake on the internet. Did you really think that anything worth having could be had so easily?

so what you HAVE and PROVIDE is what you ARE… very sad… I doubt you have much wealth, and what you provide is mere poor advice on the internet… and neither will bring you a good woman for a night or longer

you should read this website more carefully, and then also visit Italy to observe the many beautiful women and the resourceful AND often hardworking Italian guys who attract them much better than you shall

“Alpha” doesn’t mean “good person” or “bad person”. It’s a label related to socially displayed behaviors that give the impression that one is a powerful male.

In this case, it’s about packaging, not about being a bum. You’ll see bums who display a lot of these characteristics because it gives them the social power that allows them to be bums. But the social behaviors they show only work because they are indicators of the opposite.

The right attitude to take should be: “This lowlife gets laid because he learned how to display himself. Well, I’m a good man, and I’m going to learn the same stuff so I can be more effective in life”

And just for the record, the Italians have an enormous amount of power.

You confuse the productive, Nordic North with the non-productive, Dark South. There is a world of difference between the 2 halves, and a continuing terrorist campaign for the North to secede from the South has been a long on-going affair. Learn the difference.

see? neocnoconsevatims is JUST LIKE classicla conservtaivsms.
just like butthex is just like gina sex except for da cock in da butt which you will get used too after da neocns mainstrem ibutthex so do not woorryryies!

”It is for this reason that a fling with an alpha male will ruin a woman for all future men.”

isn’t that a way too sweeping generalization? the wife and mother in the comments for one belied it. she only said she thought of him fondly, not that she found her husband a drag. it does not sound like she was ruined for the man she’s now with.

Certainly a generalization, but I do see where he was going with that and I agree. If after your encounter with a dominant, electrifying, alpha male you were only ill-fated to encounter lowly, beta males who paled in comparison, because you will ALWAYS compare them to him, how will one ever be able to achieve genuine happiness and contentment in a relationship. I reckon it would be rather difficult. Self delusion may do the trick though.

The year of my boyfriend and I’s falling out was absolutely depressing. I didn’t even want to talk to men who weren’t him. I was beyond devastated and above all, entirely emotionally unavailable and numb to the touch of another man. Mind you, I’ve never experienced anything like that before since I was always reasonably quick to move on after a relationship/fling. But that is because I’ve simply never experienced a man of his caliber before.

That one year apart from him inspired so much soul searching, self optimizing, and improvement that I became a MUCH better woman as a result of it. Inside and out. How many men are capable of evoking such desire to change in a woman? I’m just saying.

The act of deconstructing someone just always seems so insulting to their being, especially when they are so much greater than the sum of their parts.

I’ll give it a go though, I love that he is wildly intelligent, unarguably good looking, has this air of not-giving-a-fuck, but is actually very compassionate to those he loves, a charming devil-people pay attention when he speaks, aptly confident and assured, loyal. Those are some of the things that make him stand out to me.

i did think about that when formulating my response, but concluded that her fantasies during sex were irrelevant. she is after all having sex with her husband and is thus faithful. this is what really matters, not her thoughts of being with the long ago lover.

lets face it. who was her alpha partner, or for that matter her present husband, fantisizing about when making love with her?

let’s not knock sexual fantasy during intercourse. it’s an aid to doing our duty to be faithful. i know jesus’ radical call that to think of another is to commit adultery in the heart, but that version is preferable to the real thing. let’s not make the perfect the enemy of the good.

You don’t get it. Her husband is the idiot, because he married the sloppy seconds of alpha cock.

That’s why we’re all partaking in game, we prefer to be remembered as the mighty unforgettable studs, knowing for sure that our conquests will be thinking about our dicks when they are being plunged by a limp dick beta, that they married at 34.

You know the deal, women are the gatekeepers of sex, and men the gatekeepers of commitment.
When the sex gates are wide open, the commitment gates tend to close, except if you’re a retarded optionless beta.

A woman only feels fondly for one man at a time. If she feels fondly for her sixty year old alpha male lover, she does not feel fondly for her husband, and is regularly tempted to do a Medea on her children by him.

Yeah, I’m highly critical of the idea of making sweeping generalizations about the mating strategies of all women. Assuming that all women like the same thing is a great approximation if you just want to get laid, I’ll give you that. Act alpha, get pussy.

However from here the approximation begins to fall apart. Some women are pair bonders, especially those from genetic backgrounds that have experienced long-term selection pressures to be successful in an economically specialized society. Economic specialization allows beta males to provide material goods to women in excess of what one would expect from a small share in an alpha male, and such “good girls” exist who instinctively won’t cheat on a beta. They’re usually nerdier, have unathletic nerdy children, often sons (see Trivers-Willard) due to high parental investment. This is not simply an environmental or a cultural thing, or a product of learning or upbringing. It is a genotype.

Meanwhile, other women, especially those from non-economically specialized societies where banging an alpha was a good strategy, will ride the carousel till they get ugly. Their genetic strategy doesn’t really worry about long-term consequences. Life fast, die young, leave beautiful children (often low investment slutty daughters).

Berlusconi definitely did a lot of supplicating, lots of gifts and money to his party girls, acting like a prostitute’s rich trick. You’re wrong insisting that he’s an alpha. The miss montenegro article looks fake, like a public relations exercise on his behalf to make him look more macho than pathetic.

Was it his money or the Countries? Alphas in tribal cultures would perform potlatch ceremonies where they acquire a good through skill (guile, talent, or strength) and distribute it to a specific person within the tribe. By the end of the ceremony wealth would be redistributed and the Alphas would always be the greatest givers. It’s how democrats get votes and republicans get rich.

Story time!

I once got wildly drunk in the company of a natural super alpha roomie, I woke up the next day 300 dollars poorer. Next to the hottest women I had ever met up until that point in my life. My last memory of that night was my roomie telling me to get us drink money from the ATM for a girl and her friends, and me drunkenly doing just that. He didn’t spend a single dime that night and got free drinks from the moment we arrived. I never bought that piece of shit another drink, but you can be damn sure I learned from his example.

Berlusconi is alpha because he’s powerful. Generally speaking, extremely powerful people get there because they worked extremely hard, something that requires a certain amount of betatude in ones early years. Thus, I would not be at all surprised to hear about him carrying forward a few old habits.

All the same, the guy practically owned Italy. You’re an idiot if you don’t think that kind of power is an aphrodisiac.

That’s not entirely true. Beta take far more risks than alphas, which is what you’d expect. As an alpha, ie head of the tribe, you’re focused on maintaining your status. The rewards for doing crazy shit are smaller. Whereas for a beta, the marginal utility of an extra increment is much higher if it’s likely to get them a status rise.

Insecurity drives people in the early part of many careers, especially high risk ones like fighter pilots, special forces soldiers and extreme sports athletes. And math and physics.

The military example is especially interesting. They start out quite beta, and within a few years become very alpha. Not many bald fighter pilots. This in turn necessitated a quick turnover of personnel as they lose motivation, and older fighter pilots are quickly shuttled into training and leadership. Not every profession is dominated by dick swinging alphas.

You’re spot on with that, given my observation of 7 or 8 of the women I have known off and on since high school. Utterly astonishing how badly their looks have faded. All of them doomed to spinsterhood.

As a younger guy I got boners for anything that moved. You could talk to me about beauty fading, but I’d just stare at you blank faced.

Now as a middle aged guy my boner doesn’t rise to a stiff wind, but I will get a hard on just looking at my girlfriend. Youth and beauty is keenly noticed by me. And I’ll keenly notice girls who are hotter than my girl, and keenly compare exactly how and why.

By now I notice drops in attractiveness from age 21 to 22. Or 19 to 20. Before the very idea would seem implausable.

Our Lord Klinton is more than the hapless good ole’ boy the msm paints.

[Heartiste: It’s no coincidence that it was the ugliest women of Clinton’s Trail of Taps who emerged publicly to denounce their charming alpha lover. The hot ones are always more discreet, probably owing to the fact that they have other alphas competing for them, and their status is not tied up in outing any lover. Just the opposite: a hot woman’s status will take a negative hit from any revelation that she was someone’s mistress, whereas an ugly woman’s status will RISE (at least among other women) should it become known an alpha dumped a fuck in her.]

Once in Montreal I had a client that was 59 years old. I took him to the mall like I do all my boys and taught him how to run game on young women. And low and behold the old bastard did great. It helped that he had been a professional
drummer all his life, so he was sort of cool.

He ended up getting some pretty solid phone numbers. Best $500 he ever spent.

I read half of it this weekend and it gets kind of technical towards the middle. It goes into selling analogies and the psychology behind them. Rich material for a Game theorist/practitioner, I would think.

I know a woman who is as far-left as a person can be and she is enthralled by Rick Perry. I was shocked when she told me. Somehow she manages to absolutely HATE the guy for his political stances but simultaneously admits she’d let him drill her like he was searching for the next well in East Texas. She went into enough graphic detail to make me almost blush.

O/T – I a discussion while out on Saturday night on the topic of what women’s Halloween costumes said about them. Anybody have opinions on guy Halloween outfits? What ones signal “beta?”

Yeah, right, because men put so much effort into carefully researching the political platforms they support. Alpha males don’t just blindly support right-wing politicians and beta males don’t just blindly support left-wing politicians. And you don’t at all have to be photogenic to get elected.

Grow up dude. Democracy doesn’t exist to choose policies. They tried that in California, the whole state is falling apart. Democracy exists to create a selection pressure against bad leadership, not against bad policy. Men and women are equally as bad at voting.

Berlusconi has also been a pretty good leader of Italy, in my opinion. Sure he’s made mistakes, and being a good leader in Italy is a pretty low bar to clear, but I’d swap him for our own empty suit in a second.

Read some of the coverage on Berlusconi in The Economist. He could have done much much better, especially with his chokehold on the media. If you get nothing done while you’re governing unopposed what does that say about your abilities as a leader?

Sometimes a leader can be too alpha. You need that edge of betatude to work really hard and take big risks.

Alphas may trump Betas, but children trump both (except for psychotic chicks who leave their families for escaped felons).

As for Silvio (didn’t he use hookers escorts), it’s an easy to follow checklist: 1) Be Italian; 2) Be a billionaire telecommunications tycoon; 3) Become Prime Minister.

So if “Being Italian” approximates the game component, Silvio can also compensate for being short, fat and ugly by being rich, powerful and evil.

Wealth and high status jobs are such obvious attraction triggers they’re known by most dumbass men too busy playing video games. Take away his wealth-given-status and Silvio’s not even meeting 18 year-old Miss Universes. The guy is famous. Fame distorts everything, which is why Berlusconi needs an asterisk.

Oh, I see, you are of the camp that there are not a myriad of various attraction triggers that work for a purpose, but that being able to push a subset of these attraction triggers makes on a “real” alpha.

Whatever.

The pussy is real to his dick, no matter how “real” his alphatude is.

If you have some other measurement of what alpha means, other than attracting pussy, fine. For me, ALL attraction triggers are attraction triggers, and equal in the eyes of the law of pussy.

The funny thing is that gold-digging and alpha seeking are the same thing. Just that in the former case, instinctual drives have not caught up to the behavioral cues of the noveau-riche. In theory, with a few generations of evolution they would become the same thing. Indeed, it’s entirely possible that there already are gold-digging females that truly love their rich beta prey (consciously).

I think this post captures the differences between men and women more accurately than almost any other site I’ve read, and I think it also explains why you see so many young men deciding to “drop out” of the dating market.

When a woman is easily attracted to a 75-year-old man, you know that a man has to have more than luck on his side to be attractive to women. I think what the editor misses, though, is that it is HARD to be attractive to women. You don’t just wake up, walk out the door, have a nice conversation with a girl, and suddenly “click” to start a lifelong relationship. No, to be with someone who weighs a reasonable amount, you have to constantly be on guard – making sure that you aren’t being too “nice,” making sure other men don’t demonstrate that they are more confident than you are, making most or all of the plans, and taking the lead in physical affections. If you don’t, then the girl leaves for someone like Silvio.

Perhaps some people feel differently, but while the outcome is good, it’s just not FUN doing all this stuff required to get the outcome. It seems to me that the men who CNN anchors criticize for deciding to spend a lot of time playing video games are making a rational decision that the potential gain, while great, simply isn’t worth the constant vigilance required to remain attractive to women.

Heck, I work ten hours a day, then work out for another hour, then spend an hour on the road, and then spend another two doing chores and cooking meals. After 14 hours, I’m just too exhausted to worry about whether I am being “cocky and funny” enough to stop her from jumping ship to older men who have a lot of money or power. It’s no wonder that other men realize this, whether consciously or subconsciously, and get fed up with it.

Aw, some girls are super busy too and my schedule is extremely similar to yours.

Why aren’t you talking to girls at work/the gym? You don’t need to go out specifically to get girls; you should have the frame of mind of doing it while you are doing actual important things, like buying groceries. Your absence and busy-ness makes you more attractive to women than you’d think.

I don’t know if this can be true in your case, specifically, but I do believe that some people grow into comfort with alpha type behaviors, and eventually internalize them such that it is no work or effort at all. They can even be enjoyable.

But if you don’t even want to get there, then you must be right. YOU can’t get there from here.

Being alpha & is about as close as you’ll get to waving a magic wand over a girl and putting her under a spell. You don’t have to learn routines or be funtime franky, they just need to know that you’re the boss and you’re gonna replace them if they start getting silly.

It will aid you in the quest to fulfil other biological imperatives too, and your body will reward your handsomely with white hot nads and the feeling of vitality. And hopefully that grin in the photo above too.

It sounds like you’ve already taken the red pill anyway, so there ain’t no turning back…. gonna have to shag your way out matey

First time poster, long time reader. I just wanted to say that this comment is probably the most relevant and accurate thing I have come across on this site.

Eternal vigilance is the price for freedom and apparently pussy as well. The truth is, I’m an alpha’s alpha, but it’s simply not fun for someone like me to do what it takes to keep a girl. While I find the feminine mind on its own to be one of the most pleasing things in existence, the female whose mind I am attracting then herself becomes extremely lame, unattractive and a turn-off based on the fact that she responds to the actual games and methods that will end up working on her.

It’s as though the process itself disqualifies her, you’re witnessing the same female who moments ago was so cool now becoming a mentally defective cow before your very eyes as she’s duped by the gross and unflattering rulebook. It is HARD to be attractive to women, but even when it works I suppose deep-down I might not like the kind of person that it attracts.

Arkham City is coming out on PC at the end of November and I will be playing it alone and then maybe after I will find some fresh new porn and fap into the night but at least I will do so as the GODDAM BATMAN!

Carla Bruni once gave an interview telling how Sarkozy was the most knowledgeable man she ever met about……….flowers! He would take her through walks in Parisian gardens and talk about every single plant in the way.

Orchids may be expensive, but some varieties may last for weeks or months. So I keep one always at home.

SOme people have the gift of producing so much sh*t in so few words. How many times it was written in this very bolg about how game trumps physical appearance for men? Even though height does matter, game trumps all and fame trumps game.

And morons who call Berlusconi evil know anything about the Italian Left? Think about Tony Blair ordering the dru g lords to shoot conservative reporters, Gordon Brown controlling arms tra,fficking in the UK, all the while flooding the country with every deject from Africa and Asia. the Italian Left is downright criminal

You just write shit without saying shit. And let’s try to at least rise to the level of elementary consistency: “game trumps all and fame trumps game.”

Top it off with a tu quoque fallacy. I almost forgot this the blog where commenters welcome a Pinochet-style military dictatorship (no doubt to “save civilization”). Fucking idiots.

Let’s not forget another short, ugly, evil fuck: Henry Kissinger, who’s referenced in the original post for his most quotable quote. Here’s a guy who would melt the skin off Cambodian babies during the day, and then wine and dine playmates at night. Well, good for him. Game is but one component. Sorry, but running the government impresses girls (and men) more than fuzzy hats and back-handed compliments.

Pinochet did save Chile from going communist. He put it on sound economic footing and it has been the fastest growing and most prosperous South American footing. Yeah he had killed a few thousand persons in the process, a similar number to Castro, discounting all that fled Cuba for the US.

Then after about 10 years he agreed to run for election, didn’t try to rig it, lost, and peacefully gave up power. Chile has been a center right to center left democracy since with a good economy.

Talking about Kissinger melting the skin off of Cambodian babies is absurd. Nixon / Kissinger decide to bomb a little inside Cambodia’s border with Vietnam because they were using it as a safe haven and ran parts of the Ho Chi Minh trail supplying their guerrilla communist fighters in South Vietnam from there.

The left’s blaming the Cambodian genocide and disaster on this is beyond absurd. That was entirely due to the savage and utterly wrong headed extreme equalist ideology of the Cambodian Communist, the Kymer Rouge.

I can fully sympathize with why someone would shoot lefties as a matter of public policy. They bitch like old women about made up issues all day long, forever and ever. People pay for their silly assed programs just to make them go away. Anytime a nation is prevented from going left, one is doing that nation a favor. You people ruin everything AND you’re tyrannical.

Power is the prime quality that makes a man attractive to women. Beauty is the prime quality that makes a woman attractive to men.

However, a powerful man is much rarer than a beautiful woman. Therefore, it’s no surprise that women cling their (rarer) alpha male lovers much longer and more intensely than a man would cling to any (interchangeable) woman lover.

I’m not so sure one is rarer. Power is relative. The local High School bully has it, as well. As does the guy owning the hot dog stand where he bones his immigrant help.

On the other hand, power tend to increase with age, up until, for most males, at least their mid 50s. Female beauty starts dropping off at 17 or so, and picks up steam past 25, real steam past 30, and goes into freefall at 35.

So memories of experiences from a better bygone is really all women have; for the entirety of their adult life. Unless they have enough children to keep them occupied. Kids are the true lasting female happiness drug, as they’ll love mommy regardless of whether she’s sagging a bit or not, getting her past the 25 year hump when hubby is hot and she is not. Then, by the time the kids are out of the house, both her and hubby are asexual geezers, content to live vicariously through their children.

Leaving Berlusconiesque Apex males aside, the SMV of the 75+ crowd, even amongst males, isn’t really all that anymore. Couples who have stuck together that long, tend to stick together all the way to the finish line.

I think it has a lot to do with the fact women are a lot more picky and particular than men. Since women are a lot less malleable and compromising when it comes to their preferences, whereas men adjust theirs to what they can reasonably and consistently attract (for the most part), once a woman has an encounter with a man of high caliber, she doesn’t even want to see or talk to anyone who is below his level. Even if it means succumbing to celibacy for some time.

Men are a lot more pragmatic and realistic, although they may miss a beautiful women whom they have encountered, they won’t fall into celibacy because of it. Their need for sexual satisfaction is a lot more urgent, more necessary. and sooner or later will go back to attracting beautiful women as per usual.

Of course women are a lot more in the dark when it comes to who they can reasonably attain for a commitment as opposed to who’s willing to use them as a nice, warm hole resulting from the fact that men are lot more likely to fuck below their own HPV. It’s all too often that a woman will go through her best years rejecting men against one guy who really gave her the tingles, but would have never given her a ring. Those women are typically fucked for life.

It’s been said that the female hotness scale goes from zero to 10, but the male scale is something on the order of 0-25. Guys like Silvio, Mick Jagger, and a few select others may be in the low 20’s. Clinton probably was, too.

Last time I checked, the person melting the skin off Cambodian babies was Pol Pot, not Kissinger. And what, Berlusconi is “evil” just because he’s not a leftist? Grow the Hell up. And if Pinochet, bad as he was, is your avatar of absolute evil, you need to read a little more history.

Of course, 3000 dead people is pretty bad, but Hell, Pinochet is even outdone by Castro. And as far as I know, Berlusconi hasn’t killed anyone, his only offence is banging hot chicks. Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot should have been so innocently employed…

Leaving aside discussions of whether or not Berlusconi is evil compared to Stalin, may I make the point that he is still nailing teenage models? Unless you can do that without power, you don’t get to talk about how much his power and money get them in the sack. Alpha = bikini clad models in your bedroom. Beta = bitching on the internet about guys with money who have bikini clad models in their bedroom.

“Anonymous” who describes Italy as a country of moochers is full of it.

The failure of the European economies is the failure of socialism. In all these countries they have run out of other people’s money and no one will lend them anymore. Berlusconi is the only non-socialist premier in Europe and the only one to have an intelligent and courageous strategy for dealing with the debt crisis. Right now, the Germans, French, Spanish, Greeks, all want to distract their populace by casting aspersions on Italy and Berlusconi, the man the socialists hate above all others.

As an ex-banker and someone who trades in the markets I can tell you that Italy is not the problem. In fact if you look at the liabilities that France will be exposed to after Greece restructures, then Italy is looking damn good. If you really want to see what is making the Europeans’ blood run cold, look at the state of the Spanish economy, where the hard-left government of that imbecile Zapertero is ruining the country. When Spain crashes the EU will break up with the sound of a nuclear explosion.

If you want to understand how Alpha Berlusconi is and do not trust the utterances of the women he has mastered, look at how he treats the socialist old media. His confidence and his contempt for them marks him out as an authentic man, assured of his own value and purpose. Its simple, men who criticise Berlusconi are betas who are angered by his power. In my view that includes the other European premiers.

Don’t be so quick to call alphaness a virtue in itself. Being beta is a stupid strategy for an individual, but betas are a necessary part of society.

You think Silicon Valley runs on alpha males? Fuck no. Academia? Ditto. Nerds are genetically engineered towards betatude, because spending all your time learning to make better arrowheads necessitated a worker drone, pair bonding life strategy. When physicists get poon, they usually stop producing their best work.

The fact that many professional sectors have a left-wing lean is a direct reflection of this beta life strategy. Meanwhile, the fact that CH has a right-wing lean is a direct reflection of our alphatude. But don’t be so arrogant as to think that an evolutionarily selected cognitive bias gives you all the answers for how to fix the world economy.

Nonlinear systems. People aren’t very good at understanding them. You are a person. Get used to it.

“When physicists get poon, they usually stop producing their best work”

you may be onto something there. it brings to mind the shakers, who renounced all sexual relations. the result? the circular saw, the round ( very efficient) barn, the flat broom, the wooden clothespin, clever home crafts. all that sublimated sexual energy devoted to inventiveness and enhanced entrepreneurship.

You are correct in asserting that there is a slight-slight lean to the right in the alpha gait of power, and a slight left-tilt to the beta aspect.

A little beta, a little compassion & love is necessary at times.

And, as you said, the alpha-beta herd dynamic is an useful analytic tool in examining social interactions, but it is in no way panacea for anything but establishing some social dominance & getting poon.

Alpha is a virtue for men, or what else is this site about? Alphas are good leaders, Italy needs a leader. That is why Berlusconi continues to get re-elected, at a fundamental level people see the value of his Alpha leadership. Harvey Mansfields “Manliness” is really clear about the values of Alpha manliness. A key book (GBFM?) for men.

There is no perfect set of answers for the world economy. That ‘s the nub of the problem, socialists think there are. Hayeks “Road to Serfdom” anyboy?

Please. Now you’re blaming socialists for thinking they have all the answers?? Both sides play that game, you just did it there by claiming that Berlusconi’s alpha traits make him the right leader for Italy. Maybe they do. We’ll never know.

I couldn’t give a fuck what Harvey whatshisface thinks about alphaness. I already know the benefit: poon and social dominance.

But we struggle to predict the nonlinear dynamics of systems as simple as a small ecosystem, the fuck makes you think we can make any useful predictions about the optimal balance of alphas and betas in society?

Fallacies abound. I’m sorry, but the argument that “this guy was worse” does not justify decades long military dictatorship. Three-thousand killed and tens of thousands tortured, but it’s all right because an elected Allende would have (probably) been way worse.

As for Berlusconi, you guys have your blinders because you want to worship “alpha” cock. Reminds me of the right-wing tards lamenting the death of Gaddafi and reminiscing about his “fashion sense” and the “handsomeness” of his youth. Please.

There’s a reason why this sort of horeshit does not make into the mainstream, much less the crap about taking away a woman’s right to vote. It’s just laughable.

Would we be allowed to safely excuse the crimes of Mao, Stalin, and Pol Pot if they had bikini clad models in their bedrooms? There’s a rule as old as time: the dictator always gets laid. Yes, this truth dramatically undercuts the lie that girls want a “nice guy.” The human rights activist is not going to be swimming in poon (even if he’s in upper-ranks of a prominent organization, and/or leverages his good-doer activities into social status). This does not, however, mean you celebrate the dictator, because while it might be beta to bitch about Italian billionaire tycoons on the Internet, it’s Omega to live vicariously through their floppy old cocks.

What’s even worse than celebrating some scumbag, is pretending to dislike him while lauding the kind of political systems and bodies that allows them to shine. That’d be democracy. That’d be women’s suffrage. That’d be disarmament of betas who are not in a position to command the national militia. That’d be a police state interfering when dads try to keep their daughters away from guys like Berlusconi. And continuing to interfere when dads shoot at guys like Berlusconi if he somehow manages not to stay away anyway.

Whineing about how “evil” the guy at the top is, when every thread of empirical evidence since the dawn of time supports the thesis that in any, absolutely any, organization larger than an ethnic clan; nice guys finish last, while scum finish first, is about as pathetic as things get. The problem is not the alphas. The problem is organizations lager than can be supported by primary loyalties. Get rid of those, and the problem of “alphas” are once and for all goners.

I try to be solution-agnostic about complex social problems, but I also tend to be suspicious of solutions that are too different from the norm. The fact that you’re the only people nutty enough to advocate a repeal of women’s suffrage and reduction of democracy makes me ask, what are you missing?

Society isn’t organized in it’s current manner because the Illuminati or the feminists or whatever said it would be so. It’s organized that way because amongst all the other competing interests, with all their various pulls, our current arrangement has the highest entropy, and therefore is the most stable.

Say we do implement your changes. That will require work, in order to overcome the pull of other competing interests. That work will temporarily decrease the entropy of the system, and thus, even in the best case, it will only bring it to an unstable equilibrium. More likely, that work will get spat right back out at you, the revolution will fail, and after a long period of pain the world will go right back to being the way it was.

>>>
Reminds me of the right-wing tards lamenting the death of Gaddafi and reminiscing about his “fashion sense” and the “handsomeness” of his youth
>>>

Can you offer a citation?

I read quite a few political blogs & websites and I saw no lamentation on the death of Mad Muammar. Instead I saw stories along the lines of “he was a creep who got what he deserved and what will likely replace him [a likely Islamist regime] will be even worse.”

The stale reality is that reactionaries tend to be more tribal, so any mere mention of left-right sets off their political allegiance. Some will have come to develop a respect for a moderate Republican like Bill Clinton and his awesome “alpha” qualities.

Re: Stuki and “whineing” [sic] about guys at the top…

Your comments are just moronic. First, making an absolutist claim allows me to dismiss you as a wide-eyed true believer. Second, in the absence of democracy and women’s suffrage we would see even more evil characters rise to the top. Berlusconi, even though he manages to use sleight-of-hand to make his crimes disappear, he’s theoretically still accountable to the populace.

Actually, I’m lamenting Qadaffi’s death because the man was on the verge of both establishing a truly independent bank for Africa, as well as bringing water and vegetation to the Sahara using a prehistoric underground lake that his men discovered. The plans to create a pipeline to bring water to the south of Libya have now been put on hold permanently. In addition he was the only driving force for creating a stable middle class in Libya, something you generally don’t see in Arab countries at all. Ironically, for all his crazy talk and dress, the man was actually a moderating force in the region.

I also lament it, because the USA has now become an Empire. What we did was nothing more or less than a colonialist invasion for the purpose of exploiting an innocent country that was a benefit to the rest of Africa. Libya has now been put back 50 years, and it will never regain it’s independence.

Congratulations Leftist pig, the country is now the monster you and yours have always bitched about. You miserable corporate tool.

well, if there’s anything dumber than supporting a neocolonialist invasion its lamenting the ouster of a man so corrupt he used his country’s vast oil wealth so that saadis butler could order the most expensive lobster & caviar dishes and fine champagnes from 5 star hotels and only nip and pick at it.

and for the record, lion, the US was an empire before you were born.

but in a broad strokes way, you are right about this “humanitarian” assassination being an imperial power play.

i personally lament his murder only because his dealings w blair, berlusconi and bush can’t be revealed before a court of law. funny how dictators in countries of strategic importance hold power for as long as they do what theyre told.

Oh it WAS worse. There were food shortages and if you didn’t sympathize with the government, you weren’t allowed to purchase goods and had to go to the black market. Also, whatever food you could produce if you were a land owner was requisitioned by the government.

I think Berlusconi is alpha in two separate categories:
(a) the fame obviously helps
(b) absent the fame, though, he’s Italian, and he simply looks like someone who the thought of monogamy would never simply occur to (and I’ve met very few Italian-Americans who don’t meet this description, I’m guessing it holds true (if not more so) for Italians, although I’ve never been to Italy or abroad) I just think it’s in their DNA.

Truth. It’s an evolutionary adaptation to the mountain of shit-tests that Italian women seem to emanate like some sort of female verve gas.

I have seen Italian women chew up & spit out lesser men. I’ve also seen Italian men game women with the most natural aplomb ever. They–we– are very natural with the laconic cocky-funny vibe, the neg, and exude style and attitude. This is more true for the older generation. There are plenty of young man-bitch metrosexual Italianos in the old country today. They are the polarity to the Guido’s on the Jersey shore.

FWIW, Lots of Italians don’t consider themselves as “white” in the strictest sense of the word. Va fan culo!

The drive for social status is what produced all the great art in Italy, the great cars, the great clothes & style. All paid for by wealthy patrons who want to demonstrate their reproductive fitness. I’d rather have all that art and beauty, than that teutonic drive for efficiency and spartan looks.

“Or are the shit tests an evolutionary adaptation to the high level of game?”

Shit tests come from women who believe they’re higher value that their man. It’s ego. Italian women have tons of it. With good reason, they’re hot and sensual, but it’s overblown. Thus it’s an arms race.

“Or is it a complex ecosystem supported by some unknown, concentrated source of leisure energy?”

testosterone + joi de vivre and a beautiful climate that produces amazing food. The Italian ideal of ‘abbondanza,’ roughly meaning richness, beauty, abundance, excellence–this is lifestyle game at its finest.

Take it a step further—getting someone else to pay for your lifestyle game–that’s the essence of alpha. Bailing out another country’s lifestyle game–that’s beta, to the bone.

Italians are more refined and elegant when they game women, even he working class men than NJ Guidos. The whole culture encourages a sense of decorum as well as clever joviality. Italian men also get a lot of practice on tourists from north of the Alps.

As it seems the $250,000/day amount is calculated from what they earned from their wedding, I’m thinking her hubby made as much as she did.

I think could learn to put up with her for 72 days for that kind of dough. Wonder when she’s ready to marry again?

Of course, being me, if I was her father or brother, I would for sure have wanted the whore honor killed the old fashioned way. After pocketing the loot, of course. She is, after all, no more than a shame and an insult to all those related to her.

Kim is a joke. She just wanted to get married to say she was married, but must have forgot that it takes, y’know like, work and stuff! Any man who asks for her hand in marriage after this is a castrated imp clearly devoid of any capacity to feel shame and rightly deserving of the raping that will commence upon divorce time.

This is so very sad, such a beautiful woman who chose to squander all of that genetic fortune and her best years being known as the most popular, vacuous whore in town. Money over everything, I guess.

I read somewhere that he proposed by writing “will you marry me?” on the ground in rose petals. Guaranteed as she was accepting his proposal, her hindbrain had sounded the ships double red alert, evacuated all pussy juice and was already preparing to engage enemy fire.

As much as I think she’s a pube, I bet the feeling of regret was probably close to that of a guy marrying a girl who turned out to be a ladyboy with a massive schlong.

What he should have done is written it in piss outside her door then rang the doorbell. They would still be married.

“It is for this reason that a fling with an alpha male will ruin a woman for all future men.”

I beg to differ. A woman is not ruined after her experience with an alpha male. She is opened up (no pun intended) to a more contemporary notion of a “man” and sure – tingles and all – it’s wonderful.
What you don’t seem to understand is that female pride doesn’t allow the man to remain “alpha” in the female psyche for very long. Our “hamsters” as you like to call them, or whatever it is you like to call them, will rationalize any situation so as to preserve our dignity. After the heated love affair/fling is over, that man is de-bunked into a history of assholes who may still turn a woman on sexually… but will never receive the amount of love he was once given at the beginning of the affair.
Many women, whom you fail to represent here, learn from their ignorance in choosing arrogant men and start valuing gentlemen. Here is the main point in why you are wrong. While you are right in arguing that women are more prone to going for arrogant men (not arguing there), many women learn the poor outcomes of those relationships (waste of time for their biological clocks, heartbreak so on and so forth) and only then grow to appreciate the nice guys. Is it sad? Yes. Do men have reason to be upset? Yes. However, you can’t generalize that all women will be ruined after this. I’m in my 20’s and have learned this lesson well enough. You don’t have to be an old and no longer attractive woman to go for nice men. Hopefully that leaves some of you guys out there with at least a bit of bittersweet hope.

Not to mention the huge double standard present here. Had to comment again. Maybe someone call help me understand.

What about the good girls? What about those women who remain virgins?
They get trampled on by men countless times. How is it that women can be held in such bad perception for needing to be broken by an alpha in order to start going for gentleman… and yet it’s okay for men to go through tons of trampy women before finally having enough of them and then finding a nice woman, who he’ll naturally expect to be a virgin, who will cook and clean for him? Just speaking for the unaccounted examples here. Do men really go for the good girls? No. They go for them when they’re in their 30’s and they’re ready to settle down. Prior to, they’ll go for all the sluts. Then you wonder why good girls go bad?

Find a woman who is being pumped by an alpha, and say something bad about him.

Then, ditto for a guy who is screwing a slut.

What you’ll find, is the woman defending the cad, while the guy laughs at the slut. Almost every single time.

That should tell you all you need to know about differences in levels of emotional investment, hence the difference in degree to which repeated such experiences are emotionally desensitizing.

Absent morality, men are built to thrive on repeated pump and dumps; while every time a woman is dumped, she loses. And repeated loss takes it’s toll. A woman trading in one guy for a higher status one is different, as it’s in her nature to seek out just that. But only if the higher status guy sticks around. Going from a relationship with a 6, to being pumped by an 8, to being dumped by him and alone, is a net 6 loss. For a guy, the numbers are better though of as additive: 6+8=14. Particularly since the 6 will be even hotter for him for bagging an 8, once the 8 finds herself some higher SMV cad.

That’s not cruel or double standards. It’s just how the sexes are wired. If convincing yourself things are different makes you feel better, please go ahead. It’s not my goal to make you or anyone else feel miserable. By the sound of it, you hardly need my help for that. But neither should it be your goal, to spout off nonsense to younger girls, leading them to make choices that ultimately only serve to hurt them. Which, in the long run, is all being pumped and dumped by some alpha will ever do.

Alphas and gentlemen are not mutually exclusive. As the host has said repeatedly, an alpha is a man that women want to fuck. A player is an alpha who indulges many women in their desire for alpha cock. Further, a gentleman is not mutually exclusive with a player. George Clooney. ‘Nuff said.

Good girls who go bad were never good girls to begin with. Read this blog long enough, and verify those findings in the real world, you’ll begin to question the idea of a “good girl” in its entirety. Every woman has a hamster, it’s merely the degree to which she exercises that hamster & gives it complete command of her volition. Any ‘good girls’ left in this culture, they are the 1%.

It will never cease to amaze me just how much knowledge women can swim through and still come out dry. So young men turn girls into bitter mean cat enthusiasts? HAH!

Alphas will go for the youngest, hottest, and most virginal mates and get them when they are older. If they want. When they are young they can also do this. If they want. You are right at the same time you are so very wrong.

Young girls will compete for the same small pool of men, they will slut it up for those desirable fellows. They will however not debase themselves so far as to let a beta drop a fuck in them for any reason related to love. Those young virgins didn’t have to give it up to an alpha cad, there are always nice guy betas trying to weasel their way in with compliments and a constant presence.

You can try and turn the argument back around and put it on young alphas, but you can’t apply it to young betas. Nice guys didn’t force nice girls to fuck bad boys. Nice girls didn’t force bad boys to fuck slutty girls. Bad boys didn’t force slutty girls to put out and cause nice girls to compete with them using sex. Slutty girls did force nice guys to turn into bad boys to get laid.

But the worst part of it is, it’s not just the sex that women shower alphas with. “Five minutes of alpha” like this article and the posts mostly confirm, is that the nice girls will forever love the bad boy over the nice guy. L-O-V-E. A woman may devalue the man over time, but she’ll never forget his name, how they met, or why he was “special” enough to fuck. The hamster rationalized itself into fucking him and it may make him less, but it will never make him nothing.

you say you “learned this lesson well enough.” my impression is that you are in your late 20’s and at the end of your rope. women dont realize they need to settle for betas out of insight. they seek them out once they discover they can no longer attract alphas, in an effort to avoid the looming specter of spinsterhood. but even then, these women fail, as they try get the highest quality beta (i.e. betas that could easily be alpha if they learned to stop doing anti-game). you make it sound as if women are capable of settling with ease. anytime you look at whatever beta you end up with, you will be filled with self-pity, always thinking you should have done better.

“How is it that women can be held in such bad perception for needing to be broken by an alpha in order to start going for gentleman.”

again, women dont go for betas because of self-reflection, but out of necessity. and you are mistaken in thinking men settle down these days. alphas and even some betas know how devastating divorce can be. so why get married in the first place? even if you find, in your words, “a good girl”, theres no protection if she decides one day to eat, pray, love her way into self-fulfillment. half your net worth, along with anywhere between 20-40% of your future income. and of course, the original purpose of marriage-children. with women getting full-custody no matter how much of a whore she is, and the courts not enforcing the little visitation rights he has, having kids has lost what little appeal they had.

look at the communities of alphas and betas-the PUA and the MGTOW. both of them adamantly oppose getting married. marriage as an institution is dead.

This is mate selection we are talking about. There is no such thing as a double standard. It’s a feminist myth and political device. Men collectively pick what they want in the opposite sex and women collectively pick what they want in the opposite sex.

As for your whining, I never had any intention of an LTR with any of the tramps I have banged. So the smart solution for a good girl 20 something is to go for 30 something guys, not to become a slut.

You forget something pretty basic… Good girls are naïve, I know plenty of girls who were gamed by supposedly nice guys who just posed like that for a couple of weeks just to pump and dump them. Good girls don’t have bitchshields or good screening methods so they fall for guys who later on don’t care about them. So stop complaining about “jaded bitches” if your sole purpose of life is pumping and dumping women.

Some (unfortunately non mainstream, although growing) religious communities still do a decent job of raising their womenfolk. The rapidly growing Brunstad Christian Church (aka Smith’s Friends) out of Uber-feminist Scandinavia is one good example. European Muslims are another, although they tend to fudge things a bit, by flying in virgin brides from more civilized places to make up for not so occasional failures in their adopted homelands.

Marrying their daughters off young also help, of course. Even in our degenerate contemporary West, the old knock-em-up-at-15, keep -em-knocked-up-till-40 strategy remains an effective anti divorce, anti cuckolding strategy. It’s just not practiced nearly as widely as it would need to be, for us to keep viable against the demographic onslaught from more sexually enlightened cultures.

Essentially what you’re saying is that some women have a pair-bonding life strategy. If there’s one thing evolutionary psychology has taught us, it’s that assuming free will exists gets you nowhere, so you might as well assume that your decision to date “nice men” (ie betas, if high class ones) was entirely am instinctual calculation. Read the book “Incognito” for a better elaboration on free will.

Generally, my theory is that certain people have a package of genetic traits which suit an alpha lifestyle (in men, muscles, social skills, good at sports that represent hunting and warfare). These people have an easier time becoming alpha. Meanwhile, others have a package of genetic traits that’s better suited for being beta (ie nerds) and that these people will only grudgingly become alpha.

This state of affairs has only come about thanks to economic specialization in primitive tribes. For example, the extreme end of beta traits is autism spectrum disorder, a disease that is not present in hunter gatherer tribes.

In essence then, these different packages of traits designed to exploit different social niches has created a speciation pressure in humans. Thus, some women genuinely are happy to date betas. These women are probably more intelligent, have less social skills and more technical skills, and are more likely to have autistic children when they mate with other nerds. And they are far happier in a pair bonded relationship.

Having said that, nerd (beta genetic strategy) males are still perfectly capable of becoming alpha, with a lot of work. I’m in this group, and I’ve found that while I’m strongly attracted to the idea of a relationship, I’m also not happy unless I can sleep around due to my learned alpha traits. Bill Clinton is probably a perfect example of this set of traits.

See, where a lot of people go wrong on this forum is through an incomplete understanding of evolutionary psychology.

There are two factors you have to consider here. One, that free will effectively does not exist. Sure, on the small scale, it does. But you don’t choose to be attracted to nice men. At some point, you brain has calculated that it’s time to get a beta, something that many women’s brains never do. See a book called “Incognito”, by Eagleman (I think) for a more detailed explanation of this.

And two: people are not in fact evolved for the small group hunter gatherer society that everybody references. Not completely. See “The 10,000 Year Explosion”, a great book by a pair of geneticists from Utah for a more detailed explanation of this. They’re the guys that came up with the evolutionary explanation of Ashkenazi intelligence.

The end result of this is that many men and women have become adapted for a life in the beta niche of large scale economically specialized societies. These are the “nice women” who don’t mind pair bonding with a beta of which you speak.

Sure, in a hunter gatherer society, the best life strategy is to be big and strong and have great social skills and be alpha. You won’t find many nerdy Africans. Autism (an extreme nerd genetic trait, especially prevalent in Silcon Valley) is unknown amongst populations as diverse as the Canadian Inuit, Australian Aborigines and Brazilian Indigenous people, all non- economically specialized societies.

People with such technologically oriented brains tend to be smaller, weaker pair bonders who aren’t good at sports like football which approximate hunting or warfare. That’s not culture. That’s genetics. They only grudgingly become alpha, their instincts suspicious of any large rise in status.

In my experience as a highly intelligent nerd, even as I’ve become alpha I’m still relationship oriented, but now I want girls on the side. The Bill Clinton strategy, pair bond but sleep around. Keep in mind that economic specialization has created a speciation pressure, whereby nerd-type women will preferentially mate with me. This is problematic, because they crave the pair bonding that I don’t wholly want to give them. I very briefly dated a model who was this type of person (her dad was a software engineer) and I knew immediately that it wouldn’t work out because I got sucked into my pair bonding instincts but wanted to keep pushing the boundaries of alpha. Picking up alpha-type 9s and 10s is a much bigger challenge for a beta genotype male.

Anyways, this is a topic which demands a lot more attention than is given on CH. All men can be alpha, but not all people have the same set of instincts. In a way, we already realize this, but in practice the parameters of human differences are vastly underappreciated.

Women’s behavior and insistence that they want one thing, yet constantly are attracted to another is easy to understand when you grasp that the brain doesn’t control what you find attractive. So women can honestly believe they want a man who is: “fill in the laundry list”, when they hook up with the guy they find attractive which is none of those things.
Personally, this is a good thing as I am none of those “beta-male” traits they talk up, but when it comes down to it, it is who can get their juices flowing that matters, and as the article point out, they will remember it for years after being in the beta-male environment, where they long for the excitement that they had.
The ability of a woman to overlook everything except what excites them is something that I am oh-so-thankful-for since it seems that every year, the eighteen year old women get more attractive… 🙂

In all non degenerate cases, absent social pressure, it behooves a women to attempt a bit of randomization as pertains to the genes she chooses to mix with hers. Intra male differences in fitness is rarely so obviously great that such a hedging strategy doesn’t beat a non thusly hedged one. She is, after all, working off of very limited available information.

So, even those women better adapted to pair bonding, face pressures to step out on occasion. Which is another reason why alpha strategies work for some men.

If you look at multigenerational models, you can tweak it so that the fittest genes are those that program any individual woman not to seek out variety, as the variety can be obtained by having enough women pair bond 1-1 with enough men. Depending on how harsh the environment, and how much you discount lack of male effort as a function of parental uncertainty, such a society may well beat a micro optimizing one in the long run. But, again absent social pressure, you can never get entirely rid of the advantage any given female can obtain by occasionally stepping out.

Now, if it is indeed such that over enough generations, exclusively pair bonded societies are fitter than any other, the people who will inherit the earth are exactly those that most efficiently rein in the innate single generation bias towards randomization. By mate guarding, and if that fails, culling/honor killing those who display an unusual proclivity for not playing by the rules. An interesting tidbit is that, even in such societies, alphas have a role to play, as they are the ones who facilitate ferreting out who the “weak” females, who society will benefit from honor killing, are.

You’ll get a lot further if you stop talking about societies and start think about individuals. Sure, group-based evolution probably exists as a weak pattern in species. Maybe. But gene-level selection is a much stronger pattern, and it’s easier to make useful predictions using it.

Societies rarely pair bond preferentially, and more than ecosystems contain one animal. Society contains both pair bonders, and early-peaking slut / polygamous alpha types. This is especially true in economically specialize societies that contain many niches.

Meanwhile, culture being set largely by the highest status members of a society, one can make predictions about which strategy is the dominant one based upon cultural features like honor killings and polygamy versus monogamous marriage. Arabs and Africans? Probably a lot of alphas. European Jews? Probably a lot of niche-seeking betas.

Sorry, I’ll go tell the neuroscience establishment to call off the hunt. The brain isn’t the seat of human cognition after all. Some guy on the Internet said it was true…

The brain performs both all cognitive functions. But it can also hold multiple, mutually contradictory beliefs. “Why Everyone (Else) Is A Hypocrite” by Rob Kurzban provides a detailed explanation of this.

I would hazard a guess that, when it’s all mapped out in a few decades (if society maintain the scientific establishment that long), attraction will look like a complex interaction between neurological, endocrine, and immune systems.

I’ll also indulge the hippie chick-crack theory a bit and state that there is some spiritual/deeper consciousness component to attraction of the best kind, that crazy magnetic attraction that happens when conditions are just so.

This is a great comment, Ian. Your understanding of genetics is very good.

There’s another layer when we begin to look at gene expression stimulated by diet, exercise, and environmental conditions. This is a complex area of research. These traits, which we can call epigenetics, are heavily influenced by lifestyle, and they are passed on for generations, just like genetics.

But clearly the number one factor in expressing alphaness is the intent–the volition and mental-emotional power to do so and maintain that frame. This has a lot to do with intelligence and curiosity.

The host has said that curiosity is the most alpha characteristic of all. I see you’ve got that trait, as do I, and a number of other esteemed commenters & other bloggers here.

Cheers bro, yeah, I do alright for a university dropout. You’d never guess what I do for a living, although I’ll probably start giving it away to anybody who pays enough attention.

However, alpha is whatever triggers other people’s evolved instincts to think your alpha so I’m gonna have to disagree with you. The most alpha trait is manipulating people into working together and doing what you say.

As for epigenetics, don’t forget the big picture: it’s still genetics. We can only adjust our phenotype in response to external stimuli if we’ve evolved the ability to do that. Still subject to the same evolutionary pressures, still working on the same rules. But I bet, for instance, that after a few generations of being alpha, an epigenetics shift towards expressing alpha traits would occur. Good luck teasing that out from the general shift to higher mate quality though.

“However, alpha is whatever triggers other people’s evolved instincts to think your alpha so I’m gonna have to disagree with you. The most alpha trait is manipulating people into working together and doing what you say.”

There is much truth to this, but don’t forget that this idea of leadership is a cultural construct, and varies widely from culture to culture. This culture-wide trait, as you said, may be an evolved, genetically influenced thing. This may be seen as a genetic response to environment–the prevalence of food & water in a given area, the building materials available, climate.

So what works in one culture may be a total turn-off in another. And you cannot manipulate people into working together if you cannot maintain frame. It all starts in the mind of the would-be alpha.

Thanks Maya. High intelligence is just part of the nerd genotype however, and it seeks itself out. All of the hottest girls I’ve ever pulled tend to be from the same genotype. There are plenty of nerds who got rich in the 80s and married models. Girls like that, you pick apart their intellectual beliefs and it’s the best form of neg to pull on them.

The guys on here who say intelligence is unattractive in a woman, well, they’re entitled to their opinion.

“This memory exerts its power in men for a different reason than women’s memories do with their alpha flings; men’s first loves are often girls in their mid to late teens (or perhaps early to mid-20s for the late bloomers) when their feminine beauty and mannerism radiates at its absolute brightest.”

Makes sense. So you think any guy I manage to get won’t be happy with me because much younger girls have ruined his brain in the past? I should probably only look for virgins who have their brain untouched then?

It’s possible to talk to younger girls, too. And I don’t think that “a man who can think” will put personality above youth and beauty. And even if it was like that I can’t really trick anyone into loving me because of my personality. There were guys hitting on me because of my looks but were turned off after getting to know my weird personality. Maybe I should just give up :S I will probably be fine without a man in my life.

You’re right. Virgin men in late twenties and thirties are probably not self confident enough to have sex with. I even have an impression that guys who’ve never had a girlfriend become somewhat shy – for no good reason of course – but maybe they feel they are losers because it seems like sex is so easily available to everyone else?
Btw. Why can’t virgin men just learn somehow what to do with a woman? (I don’t think you need any experience with women to be good in bed).

no. women are interchangeable. just show your feminine, (have useful skills -cooking, cleaning, etc.) and show a work ethic that will dispel any thoughts you might ever let yourself go after settling down (diet and exercise), and you should be fine.

I will never accept the idea that women are interchangeable – so in your opinion men never love anyone?

[Heartiste: It is possible to love more than one person in your lifetime.]

When you love someone, this person is not interchangeable anymore! Sure it’s possible to find other people attractive and maybe even love other women, but I believe that when you love someone it’s impossible to EVER throw them away … Love is forever, isn’t it?

I could never be with a guy who thought I’m interchangeable – I rather stay alone forever.

“I could never be with a guy who thought I’m interchangeable – I rather stay alone forever.”

You should probably just rephrase that to, “I could never be with a guy who tells me I’m interchangeable…” (Or at least says as much without joking and making it light. Or you will likely be alone forever. Because interchangeability is a human tendency, minus those who are overly sentimental. And this human tendency is simply a function of geographic circumstance, etc. You (and every human) is interchangeable to an extent based on geographic proximity. What good is a “soul mate” (if such a concept even exists), if you never meet the person due to geographic limitations or even chronological limitations (who says the perfect person for you who thinks you’re not interchangeable would even be born in your lifetime). So just experiencing the human condition makes prospective mates interchangeable. You can’t pair with somebody who doesn’t exist, and if that perfect person exists, and you’ve never met them, you’d simply be with someone else. Or alone, as you seem to prefer.

If you don’t want to be alone, I’d suggest you realign your views with biological realities. (And doing so doesn’t require abandoning the pursuit of love)

If I’m right, then you need to find a guy who’s got a pair-bonding genotype and isn’t so alpha that he’s shifted into a mode of sleeping with every 8+ that comes his way.

Except that if I’m right, guys like that will subconsciously only mate with a similar genotype, so if thats not you, too bad. Some women are probably born to chase alphas their whole life, then spend the rest of their life raising their alpha-spawn either alone, or with the help of an extremely beta dude who seriously has no better options.

CH seems to think that educating such women will change this, but I think that it’s far more likely to be a largely unchangeable genetic strategy rather than a learned behaviour. What does that mean for you? Figure out what you’ve been born to do, then do it as effectively as you can.

There is an old canard about Berlusconi, that he controls the Italian media. Well, he owns the largest private TV station, yet it is quite a stretch to say he “controls” the couple of public broadcasters whose staffs he can barely touch.

But since he is the prime minister we are supposed to believe he has total control over state media, which is hardly the case.

The fact is, public media has been waging a Jihad against him for 20 years, together with the Judiciary. Italians vote him in, despite the horror of the bien-pensant in both sides of the Atlantic, because the Italian left is a criminal organization who would flood the country with immigrants and the rest of the Italian RIght are either bozos or simply lack his charisma.

Rubbish. David Cameron and to a lesser extent Sarkozy are pretty much as un socialist as they think they can get away with – certainly they’re trying to move policy rightward and in Cameron’s case succeeding a good bit. Most of the formerly communist eastern block prime ministers / premiers aren’t very socialist. Nor Austria. Nor Merkel.

But the people’s expectations are and in reality, so is their concept of a well running state. Europeans can’t really conceive of a small state. Its really the legacy of enlightened absolutism and feudalism. In that sense, virtually all of the politicians noted above would be more socialist than a U.S. Republican. Most Europeans can’t understand why Obama isn’t popular.

I am conscious that The Chateau is an American website and do not want to descend into the minutiae of European politics but will essay a short reply.

Amongst the major European powers, Socialism has made huge gains. As many political commentators have pointed out time and time again, in France it does not matter what the political parties are called, they are all socialists. Private business is on its knees in France, while Sarkozy indulges in crony corporate capitalism (as most French politicians do) and expanding the power of the state.

Germany is a horrifyingly statist socialist nightmare. I have worked there frequently and every german expects something from the state, absolutely expects the private sector to be taxed to death to pay for it. Merkel is the ultimate compromise bureaucrat, is famous for it, and has the backbone of a jellyfish. She is very happy with the current german situation, she is socialist to the bone (jelly).

I am an Englishman and see firsthand what David Cameron is. England lives under the curse of the socialist Tony Blair, a charismatic actor of a man, who was the biggest political success England has seen for centuries. The English public loved him and his delivery of political messages.

Cameron has modelled himself on Blair and has got into government but continues to back down when challenged by the socialist establishment. Under Cameron’s policies “real” (declared) government spending rose to 52% of Gross Domestic Product last month. Under those same policies it will rise to 55% next year, which will be disastrous for England. Under those policies it is very likely that we will lose our triple A credit rating. Cameron wants to stay in office, has not got the guts for the work, is a de-facto socialist.

Until the Eastern European democracies gain power in Europe they don’t count, sorry and all.

Socialism is hugely beneficial to the European political class, it gives them a power of patronage unrivalled by that of any king. They have no intention of changing the situation. I refer you to Greece’s decision to refer the Euro rescue package to a referendum. This is a socialist masterstroke which will keep the current socialist dictatorship in place for another fifty years.

Your’s is a stamp collector’s argument, because they do not call themselves socialists but something else, it’s alright. Not for me, I judge them by what they do.

Berlusconi is Alpha and as such displays a natural antipathy to socialist thought.

Ahhh the Great Man theory of history. So delightfully linear and easy for our primitive monkey-brains to grasp.

Britain, Italy and every other group of people larger than 150 is far more complicated than any one person could ever understand. Sure, there’s an economic mess. Sure, there are people who are ostensibly in charge of it. Do you think they have unlimited power to act any way they see fit? Do you think that even if they did, it would transform Europe into a stable utopia?

Thanks for bringing this all out. Most Americans who even go there, visit Europe a few weeks in their lives and think they know it inside out. I think it is the height of folly for the US to follow in Europe’s footsteps. Now it is especially evident. What I least respect about Europe is its sense of entitlement coupled with its suicidal refusal to acknowledge its fundamental problems with immigration and disdain for its accomplishments and refusal to reproduce. I lived in Germany for 23 years. I enjoyed my life there immensely, but this time back, I don’t miss it anymore. I’m especially saddened for Britain. Labor has done irreparable and maybe permanent damage to British culture and society.

Also, it is an important point that you make- socialism has created a permanent European political class and they seem to be very adept at making ever more positions. They amount to nothing more than modern day nobility. The European political class has an organized farm system for future politicians. Every party has a youth auxiliary and operates as a tax free business. This is why Breivik chose the target he chose. They were the future leaders of his perceived enemy.

The last time I was in Italy, a couple of years ago, I saw this BBC documentary in the hotel on Silvio. They interviewed this prostitute who had been with Silvio. She spoke of him as being a complete gentleman and very easy to talk to, that he really loved women, they spent the whole night together, talking and making love. After listening to her for about a minute, it was obvious she loved him, that he was even the love of her life, even if only for a night. I said to my wife, this is why Silvio is an alpha, even hookers fall in love with him. That impressed me. Silvio is my hero.

Hookers are the easiest preys, especially if you’re not flat ass broke.
If you have an above average apparent lifestyle and gentleman tendencies, they really fall in love quick. They are used to bottom shelf omegas otoh and arrogant uber jerks otoh who don’t even look at them. They need something in the middle.
Of course, that applies to a hooker who didn’t go through hustling hell. The burned ass sociopathic golddiggers can be far worse than reformed bitterbetas.

This is a good reason to never give women the pleasure of actually settling down. It’s quite obvious that even though beta’s are responsible for society and civilization, that means nothing to women. To a woman, a beta is merely a tool to provide and labor for her while she hunts for alpha cock on the sly. In conclusion, women appreciate 5 minutes of alpha over decades of being a loyal husband.

With game, no man has to settle down and deal with the pain of knowing his wife loves the alpha she banged at the bar 10 years ago more than him.

A lot of people here are writing about Left Wing and Right Wing. I don’t know about Stalin, but Mao had a lot of quality poon — a harem in fact. Young pusses felt honoured to be in the company of the Chairman. I won’t be surprised if it was not the case with many other Left Wing despots. Wasn’t it Kissinger who said — power is the greatest aphrodisiac.

The assumption made here & elsewhere often seems to be Beta=STEM. Actually there are a lot of non-STEM, blue-collar guys considered beta by women. In the old days lots of hard working farmers and factory workers were abandoned by their women for slick-talking traveling salesman and carnival barkers. Basically, creating resources by work is Beta, taking resources by force or deception from others is Alpha.

STEM=nerd = evolutionary strategy to exploit niches held predominantly by betas. Spending 12 hours a day learning to fill a technical niche and ignoring social dynamics does not mesh with the role of tribal leader very well. However, such people still retain the instinctual ability to be an alpha leader (except in extreme cases of autism spectrum disorder).

Meanwhile, other people do have a genotype that’s geared towards being alpha. But that doesn’t mean that they will be, their instincts will only allow them to exhibit alpha behaviour if their environment indicated to them that it is appropriate to do so. The threshold for this will be lower than for a nerd, but there will still be a threshold.

As a further prediction, people from the second group will have a much harder time dealing with being low status. Black and indigenous peoole, for instance, are virtually all natural alphas, and without self respect they tend to fall apart the quickest.

European Jews tended to be quite happy working on the fringes of society, and they kept working hard even under intense discrimination. They also win a lot of Nobel Prizes. Black Americans? They needed an end to racism as much for their mental health as anything else, and to this day they still underperform on tests when there is any hint of racism at work. But if I’m looking for an alpha male I’ll take a Black American over a European Jew any day.

“Black and indigenous peoole, for instance, are virtually all natural alphas, and without self respect they tend to fall apart the quickest… Black Americans […] needed an end to racism as much for their mental health as anything else, and to this day they still underperform on tests when there is any hint of racism at work.”

there is actually a lot of truth to this. i remember a presentation at school about how black american women routinely give birth to underweight babies. even recent african immigrants give birth to healthier babies. of course, the subjects studied were from upper-class neighborhoods to control for diet, poverty, drugs etc. The conclusions strongly indicate that only racism could have had such a strong and consistent effect.

that’s one of the best features of this blog: for every 5 idiots, there’s a dude w serious knowledge and depth.

Just to add to this, the reason that people from hunter/gatherer genetic backgrounds decrease their work rate when faced with status pressures is due to the link between low status and resource insecurity in such societies. When the alpha males take all the food and women, it’s in the best interests of low social status males to conserve resources, take big risks and follow a short-term strategy. Roughly.

Meanwhile, rice farming societies are probably the extreme example of an economic system where status has nothing to do with economic opportunity for the average person. To a rice farmer, if you can work 14-18 hour days you’ll never go hungry.

Low status Chinese people open convenience stores and work non-stop. Low status Black people drop out of school and join gangs to compete for status. That’s not just culture, that’s genes too.

i am 60. 5 years ago I reached the other end of a 28 year long marriage. 20 years without sex. i have no problem engaging the attention of women from 28 to 40. I find so many younger women flaky that it is not worth hunting for the balanced ones. i find most older women insane and too few of them have kept their figures to be worth the effort. My age seems immaterial. It is actually easier to engage with the better looking ones. Of course, number one is a single mother 9divorced). Single women of 35 without children still seem to believe that they can have a handsome, never married, 40 year old millionaire who will love them and them only. I have advantages over teh average 60 year old. I have my own business. I lost 20 kg on divorce and now have blood pressure, lifting ability and running speed better than most 40 year olds. My reactions are slower and my eyes are going. Berlusconi is my hero. i also have no plans to retire. I have had my fun. I want another child.

If you are older then your success is proven and you have good genes; fertile women flock to you or your failure is confirmed and the symbols of age become repugnant to fertile women.

And by the way yes he is extremely shady – has been making deals with the Sicilian Cosa Nostra since the 70s….no one in Italy gets anywhere with out at least some contact with the four major italian crime syndicates….

Right, so alpha.
He drove Italy into a greek like financial situation because of his international lack of accountabilty alone (very hard to have the superstructual influece the structural this much, but he behaves so ridicoulously, he manged), he’s Europe’s running joke, and made an entire country into one. He got Italy commissioned by the EU and he has no political power anymore because he’s a salve to the various individuals blackmailing him: prostitutes, starlets, pimps, mobsters and low lives of all kinds.
He’ll be remembered as the worst state leader after mussolini and will, without a shade of doubt, finish his life in jail, house arrest if he’s lucky.
He’s obviously a compulsive, sick person whose only charme resides in paying very well for sexual services, either in cash, powerful political positions, favours, television roles and such.
It’s prostitues we’re talking about and their fees are quite high, their fees are the dignity of an entire nation.
Please don’t compare him to Clinton; clinton was a good President, and actually sexy.